To amend the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to include American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands in certain efforts to reduce diesel emissions.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Power.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 10, 2011
Amends the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to: (1) require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to allocate to each qualified state an amount equal to 1/56 (currently 1/53) of the funds made available for that fiscal year for distribution to states under the grant and loan program for diesel emission reductions; (2) revoke the requirement that Guam, the United States Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands shall collectively receive an allocation equal to 1/53 of the funds made available for states under such program; and (3) authorize funds that are not claimed by a grantee or loan recipient under such program to be reallocated to such territories.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 15, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.1020 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.1020 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.1020 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.1020 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.